Next GOP debate set for October 11th at Dartmouth College

The 2011-2012 debate schedule will take a two week hiatus and pick up again in October. The October 11th Republican primary debate is sponsored by Bloomberg News, The Washington Post and WBIN-TV, a local station which will broadcast the debate in New Hampshire. The debate will also air nationally on Bloomberg Television. Pre-debate coverage begins at 7pm ET on Bloomberg.

Air Time: Tuesday, October 11th, 2011 at 8pm ET on Bloomberg Televison

With the Oct. 11 Republican primary debate drawing nearer, Dartmouth officials are working to prepare the logistical elements of the College-hosted event. The debate, which will take place in Spaulding Auditorium from 8-10 p.m., will focus on the hot-button topic of the economy and will be moderated by PBS host and renowned journalist Charlie Rose, Bloomberg Television White House correspondent Julianna Goldman and The Washington Post’s national political correspondent Karen Tumulty.

Tumulty, Goldman and Rose have begun coordinating ideas and holding brainstorming sessions for the debate, which will focus primarily on economic issues, Goldman said in an email to The Dartmouth. “With the Bloomberg terminal, we’re uniquely positioned to back up our questioning with an enormous amount of data,” Goldman said.

Officials from the debate’s four sponsors — Dartmouth, Bloomberg News, The Washington Post and local news outlet WBIN-TV — have not yet decided on the questioning format to be used in the debate, according to Justin Anderson, director of media relations for the College. The sponsors are still considering whether Rose will ask each question or if he will also take questions from students and faculty members, Anderson said.

Of course, no participant list has been finalized since we have two weeks which can be an eternity in presidential campaigns. More details are available at a special page setup by Dartmouth College. Ticketing is closed as all available tickets were awarded first to students and faculty through a lottery system.

Nate Ashworth is the Founder and Editor-In-Chief of Election Central. He's been blogging elections and politics for almost a decade. He started covering the 2008 Presidential Election which turned into a full-time political blog in 2012 and 2016.

Fast and Furious left one agent, Brian Terry, dead. Would you prevent your administration from answering the two key questions: 1) Who authorized the operation? and 2) What was the goal of the operation? by stonewalling the investigation as the current administration is doing? Or would you provide true transparency and come forward with the answers?

Like you, I am very concerned about our current economic situation in our country, one particular concern which caught my attention is what the current administration calls “cap and trade” a bill which passed in 2009 in an effort to “Change the behavior of consumers” with a “preferred gradual adjustment on energy prices”(2008 Presidential Candidate Barack Obama interview CNN). This has impacted 95% of the Working and Middle classes; as stated in the March 9, 2009 Wall Street Journal “Politicians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing “polluters,” not workers” (which ironically workers are now dubbed “polluters”) (WSJ Online 2009). Our government has created a new commodity – the right to emit carbon with the only incentive to lower our carbon footprint is punishing energy prices — and then mandated businesses buy it, which in turn passed on the cost to all consumers in the form of higher prices in energy, groceries, etc. According to President Obama’s budget director in 2009—he informed Congress “Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program” (WSJ Online 2009). Further, according to the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas W. Elmendorf, in 2009 wrote Senator Kerry “the price increases associated with an illustrative cap-and-trade program that CBO considered would result in an average cost per household of $1,600 a year” (a figure which is grossly inaccurate and much higher annually) and further stated “The average net per-household cost would account for…the loss of purchasing power that households experienced because of higher prices….” (Elmendorf, 2009).
Lastly, the cap and trade frame work is also used in Europe, which further explains the high energy prices being experienced overseas. Respectfully as a caveat, I understand the economic principles of supply and demand and commodities trading, so this explanation is invalid. As president, will you reverse the Cap and Trade law (H.R. 2454) or modify it to reduce energy prices across the board?

With the US economy as the focus of the upcoming debate at Dartmouth College how can you not include Buddy Roemer;

BUDDY ROEMER: Bachelor’s in economics, 1964, and MBA in finance, 1967, Harvard University. Former governor of Louisiana, a four term congressman (only candidate to serve both as governor and congressman) and most recently, he served as the founder, CEO, and President of Business First Bank, a small business community bank with approximately $650 million in assets that took no bailout money from the federal government.

He has approximately 1% of the vote with a 1.5% name recognition
The Republican field is bought and paid for by special interests. They cannot even attempt to fix the economy or they would be FIRE by big business, special interests, and the banking industry by having their campaign funds cut off.
BUDDY ROEMER “FREE TO LEAD”
Roemer is refusing donations from political-action committees or major corporations and limiting donations to $100 – well short of the $2,500 allowed for donations by an individual.
Buddy Roemer has designing his campaign in response to what he sees as a major problem in modern campaigns. HE WILL FIX WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS COUNTRY
This is exactly how he campaign when winning the Louisiana governor’s office and his congressional seat. They told him it couldn’t be done then to.

On August 1, 2007, a major bridge collapsed in the state of MN, seventeen years after being sited as structurally deficient; killing 13 people and injuring nearly 150 others. Every state in this country has infrastructure that is crumbling. I would like to hear from each candidate if he/she will support the American Jobs Act to put skilled American citizens back to work, while strengthening our country. Why or why not?

The MN bridge is a state responsibility. MN used it’s highway funds for light rail, and other mass transit projects – rather than fixing roads and bridges. Why should one group of workers (skilled) benefit; while others are unemployed? This bill is just more payback to the unions in hopes of their support in 2012.

I thought that the First trillion dollar stimulus was for fixing infrastructure- “shovel ready jobs”? Why is a second one needed to give loans to Green companies that squander our tax money or thrown into a black hole that benefits only the politicians involved in passing it?

Last election, a junior senator with NO experience in the US military was chosen to be our Commander-in-Chief. Since then military funding AND pay for active duty service members have been in jeopardy more than once, and that is just the tip of the iceberg. My question for ALL the candidates: What makes you think your are qualified to not only be President, but the leader of the finest military in the world? Hoo-yah!

When economic conditions are bad why should benefits for the military personnel be a higher priority that other workers. In a volunteer military it is a job with plusses and minuses like all other jobs.

As a registered independant who believes our current leadership, both executive and congressional, have done a poor job in managing our country. I would ask the following question:

When we bailed out the financial institutions the intent was to jump start more loans to business and therefore economic and job growth. This did not occur. Corporate profits saw a huge increase in 2010 while job growth was stagnant.

Is there a process where corporate tax considerations, loan programs etc. are tied to real job creation (said jobs to be created in the United States).

My crrent mind set on voting in the next exection is to review the ballot and vote against all incumbents.

A question for “Christian” candidates:
Myself as a Christian I understand that God is sovereign, and brains, a good job, success and the money that come with it are gifts from God. When we knock at heaven’s door, as stewards of this money and as taxpayers, would the candidate expect to hear the words “I wish you had kept more for yourself”? or just the opposite? Does the Bible teach giving or hoarding?

I appreciate the viewpoint of a person who identifies himself or herself as a Christian and actually stands up for kindness, mercy, unselfishness for all people – as opposed to the brutish ostentatious sort of spokesperson who seems to guard the sanctity of life only at conception, extolling the death penalty and callously advocating the abandonment of those without health care and/or the indifference to the plight of returning Iraqi War veterans unable to find a job and/or suffering from depression, PTSD and other serious mental/emotional problems. Christ turned no one away, not even the lepers, but he did throw the money changers out of the temple. I think it is high time in this country for pervasive truth telling and justice for all.

And to Stephen…I will not be told that I am heartless because I believe that someone that brutally rapes and leaves a 7 year to die 100 yards from her home should die. I do believe that abortion is wrong, but I also believe that we should everything we can help those who have sacrificed their live to allow me and you have this discussion online. I think that congress should never be played more than an enlisted soldier, and they should rather than live in homes in D.C. they should live in barracks just like the soldiers they claim kill babies in Iraq.

You claim to want to justice for all, but by forcing me to pay for a monster to live the rest of his life when he left a 7 year girl with crushed hips, and collapsed vocal cords so she could not even scream for help, and massive internal bleeding to die is not justice. He deserves to die. Sadly he gets a painless death, because people like you claim that anything other than that would be cruel and unusual punishment. How is that justice? Please tell me.

I am tired of being called heartless, racist, closed minded, and then being told when I speak up for myself to shut up and I am shouted down by you. Either let me speak or kill me because honestly by taking away my ability to speak for myself you are just killing my country which is the same anyways.

First, Christ believed in rendering unto Caesar that which is Caesar and unto God that which is Gods. Everything else is yours. I am so tired of so called Christians claiming that in order to be Christian you have to be willing to give everything over to the government. I give 10 percent to God, 15 percent to the Government, why am I not allowed to keep the rest without being told that I am hording. DO I not have a responsibility to my family to provide for them? Am I not allowed to determine where I want to give MY money that I earn? Who are you to say that I am hording because instead of giving it to a government that wastes money on continuing to pay dead people for 15years after they have passed, 16 dollar muffins and companies that buy robots that can sing; I choose to give it the Red Cross that helps those in need across the globe? Or I choose the Salvation Army, or the Wounded Warriors. Honestly, you claim to be Christian, but you have no idea what it means to truly give.

Government does nothing for those in need; they foster the poverty in this country. You want to see real change, get government out of charity, back into security, and give the charities in this country the opportunity do what they do best, and then you will see real change.

A good president once said “..ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country..”. As president, what would you ask your fellow Americans to do to help get the ecomomy working again?

The same president once said “The American, by nature, is optimistic. He is experimental, an inventor and a builder who builds best when called upon to build greatly.” I think we need a leader who can call upon his fellow Americans to help with these current economic troubles.So I ask Again – What would you ask your fellow Americans to DO to get this economy working again?

Let say you are elected president and your 9-9-9 plan is sent to you by congress and you sign it into law. What will stop any future congress and president after your term is over from changing it into a 19-19-19 plan, or worse.

There is nothing to prevent a future congress from increasing future rates, except the wrath of the people. The current tax code is so arcane that tax breaks and increases can be put into place favoring/against select constituencies with little fear of anyone realizing it until it’s too late.
A complete overhaul in the mold of Cain’s 9-9-9 plan would erase the ability of congress to hide these actions.

For all the Candidates
Being a Soldier serving in Afghanistan, I am very troubled about what’s going on back home. I am reading about parity with regards to pay and retirement between military and civilian sectors and that our pay is continually in jeopardy until a budget is passed. There will never be parity as the civilian sector will never be asked or demanded to do what the American Soldier volunteers to do. Our elected officials will collect paychecks while Soldiers living paycheck to paycheck on the front lines may be asked to go without. WHAT WILL EACH OF YOU DO TO PROTECT THE MEN AND WOMEN IN THE MILITARY THAT ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES PROTECTING YOU AND THE REST OF AMERICA? Thank you

Question for the Candidates:
As Armegeddon is supposed to settle in December 21, 2012, and you will not be taking office until January, would you consider a period of “turnover” from the existing president? Maybe share an office for a few weeks to make sure that you’re “up to speed” on the long-term human survival plan.
I’m just sayin, as we will be reeling from tidal waves, mass power outages, famine and pestulance, it may be prudent to pass the baton more gingerly.

The US Fish & Wildlife Service, by law, CANNOT consider economic impact, job loss or human casualty when determining whether or not to make a listing on their Endangered Species List. Currently, USFWS is considering placing the Dunes Sagebrush Lizard on the Endangered Species List. If it is listed, it will be devastating to the Permian Basin – West Texas and Southeastern New Mexico. The Permian Basin has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country and accounts for 20% of domestic oil production. What would you do as President to put a stop to job-killing regulations and to correct an out-of-control government that passes laws protecting its critters while ignoring the welfare of its citizens?

Really? REALLY? Your making a race issue out of nothing. (just fyi btw I am NOT a bachman supporter) But I do agree. I live in Houston. Growing up in houston 30 years ago, it was a much MUCH different place. NOW, it is little mexico. With no disrespect intended to those who come here LEGALLY, MOST DO NOT. Don’t believe me? Come to northside. Still don’t believe me?–VIOLENT CRIME, DRUG AND GANG ACTIVITY in Houston is up 300% in the last 30 years, compared to the previous 30 years. Why?–WE USED to have secure borders, because the Fed used to follow through with thier consitutional requirment to SECURE THE BORDERS, and PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE. Instead what have we done?–We give children of illegals FREE benefits (upwards of 1500-3000.00 worth each and every month), we give them preference in our universities (I wanted to go to UT, however could not afford it, but on the application and the website, a ‘hispanic or latino immigrant’ legal or not, gets close to a 50% decrease in cost, and Federal monies to pay for thier college. The fed doesnt really UNDERSTAND the problem. To understand it, you have to live it. I am in favor of simple premise of border protection known as –COME LEGALLY, or LEAVE IN A BAG. I’m not uncompassionate, I love people, and I want EVERY person of EVERY race to be able to come here and experience the blessing of living in America. BUT NOT at the expense of our economy, our government, our jobs, our culture, and all that goes along with it. Minnesota and Canada–are you kidding–that IS NOT a fair comparisson. To say that the ‘average canadian’ is inolved in the things the average ‘mexican’ is makes no sense. Again, no racial injustice intended, look at the statistics, rougly 30% of EVERY HISPANIC MALE (illegal) in Texas gets arrested, or indicted of a crime EACH YEAR. Less than 13% black, less than 3% white, less than 1% indian, less than 1% other races. What’s worse, is violent crime, murder, rape and other aggrivated offenses occur almost 6x more likely. The average canadian…well, less than 5%. So yea, the Texas-Mexico issue is a real issue. As a texan, let me remind you of what WE SAID in 1845:

Remember Goliad
Remember Gonzales
Remember the ALAMO (General Sam Houston at the battle of San Jacinto, March 2, 1845–otherwise known as TEXAS independance day)

So sad that THEY don’t have to learn English, but rather, we are required to take spanish (in about 9/10 of texas high schools) or another foriengn language to graduate high school. Are you kidding me?-That is crap. This is America. Speak English, OR GO HOME. We are the land of opportunity, if you want that opportunity, Come Legally, OR GO HOME. This, by the way, is the concensus of MOST Texas. If you want to come to Texas, we would LOVE to have you, but come legally, OR DONT COME. IF YOU choose to come, WE WILL KICK YOU OUT. That should be our policy. And one more fact, it isn’t JUST hispanics, there are plenty of other types of illegals in Texas, so these statements apply to them all.

Herman Cain. The issue of racism has come up in the news lately.
What is your opinion on groups and companies such as the congressional black caucus and elack entertainment television. Would this be acceptable if it was white instead of black?

Question to all candidates: One of the primary reasons for the American Revolution was the fight against ‘taxation without representation’. When our founding fathers fought for this principle I doubt that they ever envisioned an America where there were so many people who choose not to contribute to, but instead, only live off the welfare system. Would you support a bill that requires a person to pay taxes in order to be able to vote? (Let me clarify that I am not suggesting that hardworking citizens who have lost their jobs have their right to vote taken from them — obviously, there would need to be standards developed that would be fair and appropriate)

The LHC or CERN – the particle collider build near Geneva that now offers at least 30K highly paid jobs was to be build in Texas but due to budgetary restrains was not. Why there is always money for wars (even the unnecessary like Iraq) but no more money for science projects like Super Collider or Space Exploration?
Can someone say in which field now is America still number one? Could someone check how many of the different parts forming the famous striking American remote-controlled drones are made in the US?

I agree. I think it is sad that we have gotten rid of the space program. I do think that we as a country should try to move it more towards the private sector, but I think a particle collinder would be an amazing thing for our country and reinspire our children to the sciences.

The recent drone strike that killed Anwar Alwaki is surrounded with controversy, because he was an American citizen. What is your stance on an American’s right to a fair and speedy trial, regardless of crime, being usurped by the Federal Government, and what would your action be in the same situation?

Question to all of the candidates:
The founding documents make many references to God as the source of our inalienable rights. Do you think that atheists can also believe in inalienable rights, and be just as committed to the Constitution of the United States as those who do believe in God?

Alan – Yes, an atheist can be just as committed, if not more so, to the rights of persons as outlined in our Constitution. The problem here is one of authority and power. If our rights do not come from God then from whom? In our civil law the answer would be the State or Government . If our rights come from our government than our government can take them away. The same would be true for any human institution. As long as a majority of people believe in God and believe that each person has God given rights that only God can take away then we are less likely to try to infringe on those rights and more likely to protect them including the rights of atheists, agnostics or apostates. As long as the latter remain a small minority they enjoy the benefits of the majority. If that balance gets turned upside down then….well…God help us!

No, you are wrong. If our rights do not come from God, that does not necessarily mean that they come from our government. You think that only believers in God can strongly believe in morality and inalienable rights, and that couldn’t be further from the truth. Whether you like it or not, there *are* other ways that people derive morality, like using *reason*, *logic*, and *common sense*. Tell me, what is the functional difference between saying “Only God can take away our rights” vs “No one can take away our rights”? Either way there are rights, so why does it have to be the “God” version? If you think that atheists or agnostic Americans don’t value life, liberty, & pursuit of happiness and don’t want to protect them then you are very ignorant.

My name is Michael Keogh and I am a freshman at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Mr. Romney, during a question about Social Security last debate you said, “There are a lot of reasons not to elect me, a lot of reasons not to elect other people of the stage. ”

My question is, what are some of those reasons that you feel you shouldn’t be elected President?

Question for all candidates:
The mantra of every Republican candidate throughout this campaign season has been to cut wasteful, failed government programs. In this climate, doesn’t it make sense to finally abandon this country’s War on Drugs, the most wasteful failure of all government programs? If not, please explain why you, as President of the United States, would continue to support this wildly ineffective program which continues to fill our prisons, drain our tax dollars and flies in the face of your cost-cutting rhetoric.

Here is a novel suggestion for replacing the “ObamaCare” law.
1. Develop a list of all persons in the United States that are here legally that do NOT have healthcare insurance.
2. Have the government open Health Care Savings Accounts for these people with $1 million dollars each. Never to be increased by the government. Individuals could add to the accounts, themselves.

By doing this the total costs to the United States Government would be only (If there are 50 million uninsured) a total of $500 Billion dollars. This would dramatically reduce the costs of ObamaCare, and make the Un-Constitutional law disappear.

“I just wanted to comment on the FOX Debate. I’m just sick of the media, including Republicans, picking our candidates. All we want those moderators to do, is ask a presidential question on the issues, and then go right down the row, with all the candidates, and ask for their response on the issue. That’s all that, we the people who will be voting for our next president, need to see. We don’t care about personal attacks. We want to hear what they will do to solve the problems in this wonderful America.

These candidates pay millions of dollars to run for president, and they deserve to give their plan on every issue, and we deserve to hear what each and every candidate has to say about every issue, and not just Perry and Romney throwing punches at each other. Newt Gingrich gives the best, common sense, logical answer to every question. Herman Cain tells you exactly what he wants to do regarding every issue, and has wonderful, conservative ideas, and actually has a plan. None of the candidates get the time that Romney and Perry get, and that is so unfair. I hope the sponsors of this next debate will change their format. We haven’t seen one well controlled debate yet.

If your dream world of outlawed abortions comes true under your administration , what penalty would you place on the person who 1. Sets up the crime 2. hires the hitman 3. brings the victim to the scene of the crime 4. Pays the murderer for a job well done ?

If you have any real principles we all know what the penalty should be, but are you MAN (or woman) enough to say it on live TV or will you wimp out knowing fully that if yousay it, your candidacy is DONE.

This is a question for all of the Presidential Candidates as this concerns and relates to every single American Citizen.
Recently 2 American citizens were killed by a drone attack authorized by the current President. They were not on any battlefield or in any area of conflict. These two American Citizens were not given any due process guaranteed under constitutional law for every American Citizen. Under Executive orders these men were labeled ‘Enemy Combatants’ and issued death sentences by The President of The United States. My question is this, In hind-sight would you issue these same orders and if any of you become elected, would you continue with similar executive decisions?

Some of the GOP candidates have tax reform proposals that include some form of a national sales tax. However, a sales tax is one of the primary sources of revenue for most state and local governments. If a national sales tax is instituted, consumers will end up paying federal plus state/local sales taxes in the range of 10%-20% on purchases.

Please explain how a multiplicity of federal, state, and local sales taxes will NOT discourage consumption in the market place and be a detriment on the economy?

Where do you stand on veterans benefits? My husband suffered a traumatic brain injury and suffers from severe post traumatic stress disorder stemming from his OIF/OEF combat tours. America would be saddened to know how many military men, including my husband, who not only “fall through the cracks” but are placed in those cracks and left to die by the leadership who sent them there. He has no purple heart, was not properly examined while in Afghanistan, and didn’t receive proper medical treatment after returning home. I have written emails, letters, and numerous phone calls to members of the House, Senate, and President Obama and the First Lady, all without response, except for Walter Jones of NC. We can all have our own opinions about this war….but I’m more concerned about the many broken men coming home and the wives and mothers who have to take care of them when the government fails to follow through.

GIVE DR. RON PAUL THE ATTENTION HE DESERVES. HE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT FOR DECADES. YOU OWE IT TO YOURSELVES AND FAMILY TO READ UP ON DR. RON PAUL. WE NEED AN HONEST PERSON RUNNING THIS COUNTRY NOT ONE THAT PROMISES YOU AN UNFULFILLED DREAM. THIS COUNTRY IS ON IT’S LAST ECONOMIC LEG!

Redemption of America’s Government.
Would each Candidate please list the top Three branches of Government they think is most in need REDEMPTION and how they would redeem the absolute worst of those?

Fast and Furious is but one example of such.
Department of Energy is another.
Department of Education is another.
On and on. But WHICH do the CANDIDATES think are the top three worse and explain how they would redeem just one.

First, the three (3) branches of Government are The Judicial, The Executive, and the Legislative Branches.
The examples you have mentioned are all in the Executive Branch of the United States Government.
Please know what you are talking about before you place it in these questions for the canidates for the Executive Branch.

TO ALL CANDIDATES,
If elected, what do you propose to do about the unjust law created by Congress called the USFSPA (Uniformed Services Former Spouses Act)10 U.S.C. sect 1408? This law us unjust to the service members who are being unjustly forced to give up portions of their retired/retainer pay to former spouses for life. No other law in the United States discriminates against the military retirees more than this law. I understand this law was added to the Defense Approprations Bill to get it through the Congress. There are no other laws within the United States Codes that require the life-long payments, even if the former spouse remarries and makes more money than the retired military member. There is more information available to the public at this website: http://www.ulsg.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1 I truely believe this law to be Unconstitutional and needs repealed as soon as possible.

TO ALL CANDIDATES,
If elected, what do you propose to do about the unjust law created by Congress called the USFSPA (Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act)10 U.S.C. sect 1408? This law us unjust to the service members who are being unjustly forced to give up portions of their retired/retainer pay to former spouses for life. No other law in the United States discriminates against the military retirees more than this law. I understand this law was added to the Defense Approprations Bill to get it through the Congress. There are no other laws within the United States Codes that require the life-long payments, even if the former spouse remarries and makes more money than the retired military member. There is more information available to the public at this website: http://www.ulsg.org/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1 I truely believe this law to be Unconstitutional and needs repealed as soon as possible.

The only candidate with remarkable business experience and appealing pro-growth economic ideas is Cain. This will become apparent in Tuesday’s debate and he will vault into serious contention. It is time for *real* change.

At the next debate, I am going to try and pose the following question, I don’t care who answers it, but I hope all present give some answer:

Alright, this is a three part question, so if you could ask each part in sequence, that would be wonderful, thank you. Part one: Have you read the United States Constitution and its associated documents, including the Federalist Papers and the Writings of Montesquieu? Part two: Are you familar with the Supreme Court’s rulings on the various Amendments of The Constitution and its asociated documents, including those mentioned in part one? Part three: Having answered and unserstood parts one and two, what Legal Justification do you have for blocking Gay Marriage, Reinstating Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and continuing to deny Equal Rights to Gay and Lesbain Citizens?

Herman Cain is a great leader and he has experience solving problems, but he doesn’t know enough to be President of the United States. The speech that he is wowing the crowds with now is the exact same speech that he’s been doing for years, almost word-for-word. If you’ve actually been following him from the beginning, it’s getting old and you realize that he severely lacks on substance. Newt Gingrich is the one who has the substance and is ready to lead with the 21st Century Contract with America.

My hope is that, in the next debate, Herman Cain is asked about the FairTax that he supports. Almost everyone knows that the FairTax would include a national tax on retail goods and services. What most people, even supporters of the FairTax, do not seem to know is that state/federal/local government employer’s overall wages would be taxed at 23% under the FairTax. So, except for teachers/trainers and not-for-profit government enterprises, almost every other government employer’s overall wages paid to their employees would be taxed at 23% under the FairTax. This means the U.S. military, local police departments, and local fire departments, for example, would have their overall wages paid to employees taxed at 23%. This is documented in a very limited way in the FairTax books and FairTax articles, but it is true. This is from the article “Why the FairTax Taxes Final Government Consumption” available at the fairtax.org site itself (http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Why%20the%20FairTax%20Taxes%20Final%20Government%20Consumption.pdf):

“The FairTax determines the taxable value of governmental consumption to be equal to the sum
of:
(1) the dollar value of the labor used to provide the government service, and
(2) the cost of what the government purchases in order to provide the service.
Therefore, to tax (1), The FairTax Act of 2011 (HR25) requires each governmental unit to pay the FairTax on the total compensation paid to all its employees. To tax (2), HR25 imposes the FairTax on government purchases of all goods and services from businesses.”

FairTax supporters in the article will argue that taxing your local police department’s wages is to “level the playing field” with private competitors that must charge for their services. Ask yourself, who are my local police truly in direct competition with in the private sector? Paul Blart Mall Cop? Also, ask yourself is their really a reasonable expectation that having your local city policed entirely by one or more private police companies is likely, feasible, or even a good idea? Your local police are an extension of your U.S. military and must “provide for the common defense” as the Constitution defines as a role of government. And if you don’t think so, think about this: Besides police officer’s day-to-day keeping of the peace in our cities, who were the first on the scene to preserve, protect, and defend the city of NY on 9/11? You guessed it, it was the local police and fire departments of NY.

FairTaxers will also argue that government run agencies will have their wages taxed and that individuals working for those agencies will not have their wages taxed by the FairTax. Well, crap always rolls downhill. If a police department’s overall wages are taxed at a higher overall rate of 23%, those police department’s will invariably take up the increased costs out of their employee’s salaries as wage cuts.

All I am saying is that someone needs to ask Herman Cain why he supports the FairTax taxation of wages paid by government employers like local police departments. I’ll bet Cain either says the FairTax only taxes retail goods and services and doesn’t tax wages or he will blindly support all things about the FairTax as it is the perfect unalterable gospel in the minds of FairTaxers.

Does it not appear that there is a major problem between state’s rights and federal power? In the last few weeks we have watched an enormous waste of money being put into court battles over immigration and now marijuana drug laws. It appears that the old adage of local control will be fought using our own money against us by a debt ridden federal government. Should the Federal government let states lead for their own people? Why does the federal government fight so hard to protect its failed policies?

Question for Mr. Cain: I watched your interview by Lawrence O’Donnell and noticed your lack of participation in any Civil Rights protests from 1963 to 1967. Currently, you made big notice about a rock at a remote Texas hunting site from 20+ years ago. My question to you: Why haven’t you brought big notice to the “well-known” lakes and other visible U.S. locations with similiarly offensive names over the past 20+ years, until it became politically expedient?

Question for all candidates,
Our current President, made all kinds of promises while campaigning, he stated he would “ban all earmarks” & lobbyists would not be in his whitehouse…what is your stand on these issues?

Question for Rick Perry:
You called a special session to pass a bill that prohibits tax payers
from having access to your travel & entertainment expenses. Why do
you think taxpayers should not have access to the way in which you
spend their money?

Last week you said in a speech in Charleston that we need to spend more and modernize the military. Using the Navy as an example, why do we need 11 aircraft carriers when all the other countries on this earth have only a total of 10 and 9 of those are owned by our allies? In addition 11 our carriers are of much higher capability than any of the carries of any other country. Also every carrier requires at least 1 Aegis cruiser, 2 destroyers, 1 or 2 subs and a couple replenishment ships to support each carrier group.

Why does the US have 9 amphibious attack ships and all the other navies of the world have only a total of 5 and all of them are our friends? The last amphibious invasion we conducted was 60 years ago at Inchon during the Korean War. What country do we think we will be invading with amphibious ships in the future? None I hope as they would get wiped out given the technology that has come about during the past 50 years. Secretary Gates as much admitted this when he rejected the Marines request for a new expensive landing craft as they would be blown out of the water before they hit the beach.

Now the Navy wants to build a new 50 ship class of patrol boats to protect the sea lanes from pirates when almost all merchant ships fly a “flag of convenience” to avoid employing US sailors or paying us taxes. Are we totally nuts?

We can no longer afford to be the worlds military policeman.

Not picking on just the Navy but as a former Navy Officer I know a little more about it than the other services. I am sure other folks that are more familiar with the Army and Air Force can find equally insane expenditures with them.

It is shameful that Gov. Gary Johnson has not been invited to this debate. He is a legitimate candidate with a phenomenal record who is making a concerted effort to reach voters, and he polls well when you control for the variable of name recognition.

He would also provide a diversity of ideas, as he is the only major GOP candidate who is not a social conservative.

Question for all candidates, starting left to right: If you were a member of congress on Oct. 1, 2008, how would you have voted for the Bush $700 billion TARP bailout of the banks? Up or down votes only; no abstentions allowed. 30 seconds each to explain your vote, no rebuttals.

My question is: Given that 98% of scientists agree that global warming is strongly correlated to human activity, and given that the Pentagon has been warning for years (at least since 2004) that climate change is a serious threat to national security, what bold actions would you take to address this critical matter of concern to every human on the planet? There are job opportunities here too! Better we should create jobs to reverse this trend than have to create jobs to clean up after ever more serious hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and other repercussions of global warming.

Why are these debates on only certain T.V. Channels? If we want a really informed public, why not put it all on as many channels as possible. Why are the taxpayers donating to campaigns when they cannot even see the debates? Many people cannot afford to have all the channels on their T.V. providers and many older people also are not computer savy. Seems to me all the debates are only created for certain T.V. channels and websites on computers to make a lot of money hosting these events. The poor smuck on the street seldom gets to view any of them.

bold action to reign in carbon emissions in the USA will entail a huge hit on our economy and make no appreciable difference since the source of ever increasing amounts of carbon are from China, India and other developing nations that will not join what has become a political crusade. The only viable solution to uncertainty about climate change will be an alternative energy source that is marketable.